What will it take for Chauncey to get fired?

[Phatguysrule]

Well, San Antonio the past few years fully committed to their rebuild... unlike us who still have a vet in Jerami that could start on a lot of contenders and would be the sixth man on the rest. Seriously everything you point to when trying to find measurable reasons Chauncey is bad just point back to Joe fucking shit up.

That's not me saying that Chauncey is good but until Joe actually gives him a roster that makes sense and asks Chauncey to start trying to make that roster get better and better throughout the season instead of telling him to sit more and more guys as the season goes on, we can't know for sure that Chauncey is a bad coach.

San Antonio has done what serious teams do.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Aren't you English or something? You can't detect sarcasm?

It's not sarcasm, he's saying that you can have success without being thought a good coach, because (and this is his sincere point) the only thing that matters is the talent of the players. Which is bullshit, but if it were true that a shit coach could win with his own system, rather just be a caretaker running somebody else's, he might have a point.

 

[blazerkor]

San Antonio has done what serious teams do.

I just hope that either in the next week or more likely at the trade deadline, that Joe for the first fucking time in his tenure, tries to build a cohesive roster. I'll just spam this one more time... Ant doesn't make sense with Scoot and Shaedon and Jerami doesn't make sense here at all.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Ant doesn't make sense with Scoot and Shaedon and Jerami doesn't make sense here at all.

100%
The only thing Ant and Grant can do is hurt our draft odds. Either we'll keep them and pretend they are injured to salvage our draft odds (which will just hurt their trade value more and we'll get less for them), or we'll play them to up their trade value in an attempt to get another 2nd rounder out of them or something and we'll win games we wouldn't and shouldn't otherwise, likely hurting our draft odds.

Or we'll actually say we're done rebuilding and try to win as much as possible. Which will almost certainly doom us to being (at best) almost as good as we were with Dame. Unless we get lucky and draft the next Clyde Drexler outside the top 10.

 

[THE HCP]

All he did was run Kerr's system. For, what? a month? Aren't you the guy who harps on about drawing conclusions from small sample sizes? How'd he do when he was hired by Sacramento?

Nah he coached that team for the first 50 games I believe. I’m saying a coach doesn’t mean shit……he went to a Sac team that had no talent and it showed that. Bring last years COY to Portland this season and we still will win 19-20 games. Sorry it’s how I feel.

 

[HoopsFanAZ]

Billups hasn’t lost the locker room to this point. That alone tells me the players understand the situation, want to improve and win, and see a “good coach” in Billups. The young, next-up core gives plenty of hope and something Billups can work with — Clingan, Avdija, Sharpe, Scoot … and Walker, Camara, Rupert, Murray, Time Lord. But does he WANT TO if the tear-down part of the rebuild gets finished? Right now, winning “too much” is NOT an option.

The problem for Billups because of wanting to win BUT needing to tank are the best Trail Blazers players:

(1) Ayton likely won’t fit with Clingan. If Time Lord could stay healthy, I can see RW staying.
(2) Ant isn’t a floor general (if Scoot doesn’t work out) and doesn’t have a star at forward (or even a SG) who runs things who would let him be a scoring guard at PG (like Steve Kerr). Regardless, Ant doesn’t fit (size and D) with the more likely keepers in Scoot and Sharpe.
(3) Grant at AGE 30 and the longest contract. If he was 3-4 years younger? Keep him and have a frickin’ good 3 forward rotation. [BUT then how well will he age and if other contracts were gone …?]
(4) Thybulle isn’t a problem with age or his one end of the court impact or contract. BUT he chose to sign with Dallas, and right now I’d like to see him on a much better team. He won’t start ahead of Avdija or Sharpe or the STAR to arrive in ‘25. Trade.

Letting the contracts run out is not a risk I’d take. Try to get useful, young prospects who might pop AND draft capital even if not of lottery quality.

At this early into his career Billups has racked up a craptastic record. If he committed to finishing the rebuild and the time it will take to become a contender, then it could be a GREAT story.

But is he a good coach? I just don’t know.

 

[kjironman1]

Billups is fine. Still learning the ropes. Might as well learn with a team that isn’t supposed to win. When the team gets better Billups will look better.

 

[riverman]

I'm not sold on Billups at all. He's had 3 years to have an identity and he's still yet to put a stamp on the team, young or not. I miss Stotts more than ever. I think Chauncey is better suited in the front office than on the bench. This season is probably his last head coaching job anywhere.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Sorry it’s how I feel.

I'm sorry it's how you feel, too. You should try THINKING instead.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Obviously there isn't just one quantity "coachiness" that good coaches have a lot of and bad coaches only a little. There are many dimensions. And Chauncey certainly has one of them: charisma. He exudes calm, and I'm pretty sure his team respects him (which is not nothing - you can be a genius Xs and Os guy and if nobody listens it's useless). But I have no confidence that he has an elite understanding of the game that he can translate to a well-oiled machine on the court. Don't forget that we are the only team in history to be blown out by 60+ TWICE IN ONE SEASON. I watched a Clippers team in the 90s that only just avoided the worst record in history and they never got close to that.

 

[kjironman1]

Obviously there isn't just one quantity "coachiness" that good coaches have a lot of and bad coaches only a little. There are many dimensions. And Chauncey certainly has one of them: charisma. He exudes calm, and I'm pretty sure his team respects him (which is not nothing - you can be a genius Xs and Os guy and if nobody listens it's useless). But I have no confidence that he has an elite understanding of the game that he can translate to a well-oiled machine on the court. Don't forget that we are the only team in history to be blown out by 60+ TWICE IN ONE SEASON. I watched a Clippers team in the 90s that only just avoided the worst record in history and they never got close to that.

One of the “Coachiness” things a good coach needs is good players.

 

[riverman]

One of the “Coachiness” things a good coach needs is good players.

you need to be able to pace your best players without running them into the ground and ending the season with 3rd string rosters. Chauncey's endgame is not impressive playbook wise. He's too content with losing post game as well. Reminds me a lot of Mo Cheeks. I think Chauncey has improved but not much so far. A 3rd year coach shouldn't be still trying to figure out his team's identity regardless of the talent level.

 

[kjironman1]

you need to be able to pace your best players without running them into the ground and ending the season with 3rd string rosters. Chauncey's endgame is not impressive playbook wise. He's too content with losing post game as well. Reminds me a lot of Mo Cheeks. I think Chauncey has improved but not much so far. A 3rd year coach shouldn't be still trying to figure out his team's identity regardless of the talent level.

Well? They are losing on purpose. That is the teams identity at this point. Call me when they decide to start playing to win again and I can get a better idea of what the coach is doing?

 

[Phatguysrule]

Well? They are losing on purpose. That is the teams identity at this point. Call me when they decide to start playing to win again and I can get a better idea of what the coach is doing?

If they aren't playing to win then they need to move off of their middle-aged players and embrace the suck.

This is where I'm concerned. If we aren't going to try and have a good coach (or even hold the coach accountable) then why are we keeping players who can help us beat bad teams that won't be good players when we're competing for championships?

It reeks of trying to go two different directions and splitting the difference. That's a recipe for mediocrity for a long time unless lightning strikes and you get a Hall of famer outside the lottery.

 

[kjironman1]

If they aren't playing to win then they need to move off of their middle-aged players and embrace the suck.

This is where I'm concerned. If we aren't going to try and have a good coach (or even hold the coach accountable) then why are we keeping players who can help us beat bad teams that that won't be good players when we're competing for championships?

It reeks of trying to go two different directions and splitting the difference. That's a recipe for mediocrity for a long time unless lightning strikes and you get a Hall of famer outside the lottery.

Thunder is loud! Thunder can shake the ground we walk upon! Thunder is impressive!
But its lightning that does all the work!

 

[THE HCP]

I believe we lost two games by 60 because we rolled out junior college talent against NBA players.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

I believe we lost two games by 60 because we rolled out junior college talent against NBA players.

And you think other teams haven't done the same and NOT lost by 60? Because I can assure you, even those "JC" talent players were better than what the Clippers rolled out.

 

[THE HCP]

And you think other teams haven't done the same and NOT lost by 60? Because I can assure you, even those "JC" talent players were better than what the Clippers rolled out.

Not sure what you’re asking FAMS.

 

[THE HCP]

And you think other teams haven't done the same and NOT lost by 60? Because I can assure you, even those "JC" talent players were better than what the Clippers rolled out.

Are you claiming we don’t lose by 60 twice with a different coach?

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Are you claiming we don’t lose by 60 twice with a different coach?

Absolutely.

 

[riverman]

Are you claiming we don’t lose by 60 twice with a different coach?

I'm claiming we win a whole lot more close games with a better coach and possibly stay healthier as well. Chauncey 3 years in is still admitting he's trying to figure out this coaching thing. Something Malone would never have to say or 28 other head coaches in the league. Chauncey is ranked 30th right now.

 

[KingSpeed]

Hot take: Billups will end up being the longest tenured Blazers coach ever. He’ll never get fired as long as we’re trying to lose and that could last a few more years.

 

[Whyachi]

Hot take: Billups will end up being the longest tenured Blazers coach ever. He’ll never get fired as long as we’re trying to lose and that could last a few more years.

Blazers are 28th in committed salary for the 26/27 season. Of course Billups wants to coach this team. Signing new extensions will go hog wild. Sneak one in for Billups.

the main proponent popping up in Blazer chats, is Billups hasn't had a chance to coach a good team. Therefore, until the Blazers get better, Billups will be coach.

or we can use the Coach Popovic comp. Pops has been coaching a bad Spurs teams for years. Now they drafted Wemby. The system works.

 

[jlprk]

Add coaching and 2 years experience to the young guys, and there's a contender.

You actually think we have the talent to be a contender right now?

A contender to make the playoffs, not win a championship. After 2 years of the new coach if he's good.

 

[Phatguysrule]

A contender to make the playoffs, not win a championship. After 2 years of the new coach if he's good.

Hmm. Ok, thanks for sharing.

I think we're still 2 or 3 good players away from being able to survive the season and still be healthy enough in the playoffs to be a consistent threat. And that's after guys develop.